LAWS(CAL)-1979-3-39

BADRUJAMAN Vs. THE SUB

Decided On March 21, 1979
Badrujaman Appellant
V/S
The Sub Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mrs. Maitra undertakes to file Memo, of Appearance on behalf of the respondents by today. Accept the same. Putting in of requisites for service of notice is accordingly dispensed with, Filing of paperbooks is dispensed with. The appeal and the application, by consent, are treated as on today's list for hearing.

(2.) The appellant-petitioner has obtained a Civil Rule challenging the authority of the Sub-divisional Officer, Sadar, Hooghly to hold a proceeding under Sec. 49(2) of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act. The Sub-divisional Officer, Sadar North, has called upon the appellant-petitioner to establish his' claim to get raiyati settlement of the plots, mentioned in the impugned Memos. The learned Single Judge has refused the appellant's prayer for interim order of stay of the said proceedings before the Sub-divisional Officer Sadar, Hooghly. Hence this appeal has been filed.

(3.) Mrs Mukti Maitra, appearing on behalf of the State-respondents, has placed before us two Notifications issued by the Government of West Bengal, Land Utilisation and Reforms and Land and Land Revenue Department, Land Reforms Branch Notification No. 15952-L. Ref./2A-25/72 dated 26th Oct. 1972 under Sec. 2(12) of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955 and No. 109-L Ref/2A-25/72 dated 13th Jan., 1978. The Governor has purported to appoint, by the said two Notifications, the Sub-divisional Officers and also the Additional Sub-divisional Officers as Revenue Officers under Sec. 49(2) of the Act within the local limits of their jurisdictions. The appellant-petitioner has not challenged the validity of these Notifications. Further, the State Government by Notification No. 15954-L Ref/2A-25/72 dated Oct. 26, 1972 had specified the Additional District Magistrate to be the authority to whom an appeal against an order under Sec. 49(2) of the Land Reforms Act may be preferred, in the above view we are not inclined to interfere with the order of the learned Single Judge refusing the prayer for interim orders in the Civil Rule in question.